We tested Watsons Creek for pH level, temperature and conductivity.
At approximate ten metre intervals we placed probes in the water and recorded the results.
GPS
pH
Conductivity
Temp
Mark 1
0340349S
5771515W
6.90
325.4
14.7
Mark 2
0340327S
5771505W
4.17
326.4
13.8
Mark 3
0340357S
5771504W
6.46
328.3
12.5
Mark 4
0340346S
5771500W
5.06
327.8
12.0
Mark 5
0340324S
5771497W
7.30
328.2
14.0
Mark 6
0340327S
5771495W
7.00
328.3
12.0
Mark 7
0340320S
5771492W
7.21
328.3
13.9
Mark 8
0340305S
5771500W
7.11
328.3
14.0
Mark 9
0340304S
5771487W
7.00
328.3
14.4
Mark 10
0340302S
5772487W
6.82
328.3
15.5
Mark 11
0340299S
5771449W
6.24
328.3
16.1
Mark 12
0340304S
5771448W
6.12
327.5
16.1
Mark 13
0340309S
5771433W
8.7
327.3
14.2
Mark 14
0340296S
5771428W
7.00
327.3
13.9
Mark 15
0340281S
5771436W
4.20
255.0
14.0
Mark 16
0340266S
5771432W
3.98
262.0
13.6
Mark 17
0340251S
5771426W
7.16
326.3
12.8
Mark 18
0340236S
5771429W
5.10
327.0
14.0
Mark 19
0340228S
5771421W
4.22
327.3
13.2
Mark 20
0340215S
5771424W
4.80
327.3
13.0
Mark 21
0340205S
5771421W
5.01
327.3
12.8
Mark 22
0340197S
5771410W
4.03
326.6
15.8
Mark 23
0340186S
5771409W
6.41
327.0
12.7
Mark 24
0340173S
5771414W
3.21
310.0
13.3
Mark 25
0340174S
5771433W
4.10
323.4
11.3
Mark 26
0340157S
5771425W
3.73
317.5
13.9
Mark 27
0340144S
5771415W
4.24
323.0
11.5
Mark 28
0340139S
5771400W
4.70
323.8
12.0
Mark 29
0340133S
5771393W
4.06
320.6
12.5
Mark 30
0340123S
5771386W
4.38
323.1
12.5
Mark 31
0340120S
5771377W
4.53
324.5
12.4
Mark 32
0340106S
5771372W
6.46
326.6
12.2
Mark 33
0340094S
5771358W
6.49
326.7
12.6
Mark 34
0340083S
5771350W
6.58
326.8
12.7
Mark 35
0340066S
5771339W
6.88
325.3
11.6
Mark
pH
12
6.73
13
6.80
14
6.80
15
6.81
16
6.72
17
6.76
18
6.73
19
6.63
20
6.62
21
6.56
22
6.42
23
6.59
24
6.47
25
6.49
26
6.38
27
6.30
28
6.28
29
6.27
30
6.17
31
6.13
32
6.10
33
6.00
34
5.70
35
5.06
Mark
pH
12
7.08
13
7.12
14
7.17
15
7.12
16
7.18
17
7.14
18
7.06
19
6.92
20
6.70
21
6.51
22
6.50
23
6.88
24
6.95
25
7.02
26
6.97
27
6.90
28
6.88
29
7.00
30
6.98
31
6.95
32
6.90
33
6.90
34
6.77
35
6.50
Initial graphed results.
After our initial survey we found conductivity and temperature to be of no particular worry.
pH levels however were of interest. Some extremely low values at marks 16, 24 and 26 pose potential problems. some higher values around mark 13 also were worth reconsidering.
19/10 - After analysis of these alarming results, the pH level test was redone (graph pH-2). The secondary testing was after heavy rainfall and storm movement which flushed significant amounts of water through the creek system.
As the reserve area (marks 1-11) posed no particular threat and is difficult to access, this area was not re-tested. pH levels after the initial flush out balanced, steep peaks were seen to reduce. There was a general negative trend down the river. The range also reduced with a maximum of around 6.9 and a minimum of 5.0. Evidently the water system was still acidic. Marks 22 and 35 were still of particular interest however as the lowest pH levels existed here as extreme values and did not fit the general linear regression. Drain outlets exist at these marks. At mark 22 a small outlet stems from our VCE centre. At mark 35 one stemmed from gym.
25/10.
After yet another rainfall we the pH levels were retested.pH levels had increased with a range now from 6.4-7.1The further decrease in range was a good indicator of improved river health after a further flush out. Although these values were still minorly acidic this is fairly natural and a fairly healthy average value.
Marks 22 and 35 still posed possible future threat and supported that the drains possibly have a net acidic outflow.The decreases were less steep and were gradual indicating the acidic output had diffused further up and down the creek.
The generally flat and linear gradient supported that with regular flushing, the pH levels can be kept healthy. In conclusion of these tests, although the water way shows levels that are all healthy it indicated that without being flushed through regularly it can easily become acidic. In summer this could be a serious problem.At marks 22 and 35 the outflow from the drains needs to be investigated as this is causing a drop in pH and poses future threat. With regular rain fall however, the river is able to maintain a healthy pH level, conductivity and temperature range. Time permitted we should test for invertebrate life to see whether there are other qualities that determine the river’s ability to support life.
We tested Watsons Creek for pH level, temperature and conductivity.
At approximate ten metre intervals we placed probes in the water and recorded the results.
5771515W
5771505W
5771504W
5771500W
5771497W
5771495W
5771492W
5771500W
5771487W
5772487W
5771449W
5771448W
5771433W
5771428W
5771436W
5771432W
5771426W
5771429W
5771421W
5771424W
5771421W
5771410W
5771409W
5771414W
5771433W
5771425W
5771415W
5771400W
5771393W
5771386W
5771377W
5771372W
5771358W
5771350W
5771339W
Initial graphed results.
After our initial survey we found conductivity and temperature to be of no particular worry.
pH levels however were of interest. Some extremely low values at marks 16, 24 and 26 pose potential problems. some higher values around mark 13 also were worth reconsidering.
19/10 - After analysis of these alarming results, the pH level test was redone (graph pH-2). The secondary testing was after heavy rainfall and storm movement which flushed significant amounts of water through the creek system.
As the reserve area (marks 1-11) posed no particular threat and is difficult to access, this area was not re-tested. pH levels after the initial flush out balanced, steep peaks were seen to reduce. There was a general negative trend down the river. The range also reduced with a maximum of around 6.9 and a minimum of 5.0. Evidently the water system was still acidic. Marks 22 and 35 were still of particular interest however as the lowest pH levels existed here as extreme values and did not fit the general linear regression. Drain outlets exist at these marks. At mark 22 a small outlet stems from our VCE centre. At mark 35 one stemmed from gym.
25/10.
After yet another rainfall we the pH levels were retested.pH levels had increased with a range now from 6.4-7.1The further decrease in range was a good indicator of improved river health after a further flush out. Although these values were still minorly acidic this is fairly natural and a fairly healthy average value.
Marks 22 and 35 still posed possible future threat and supported that the drains possibly have a net acidic outflow.The decreases were less steep and were gradual indicating the acidic output had diffused further up and down the creek.
The generally flat and linear gradient supported that with regular flushing, the pH levels can be kept healthy. In conclusion of these tests, although the water way shows levels that are all healthy it indicated that without being flushed through regularly it can easily become acidic. In summer this could be a serious problem.At marks 22 and 35 the outflow from the drains needs to be investigated as this is causing a drop in pH and poses future threat. With regular rain fall however, the river is able to maintain a healthy pH level, conductivity and temperature range. Time permitted we should test for invertebrate life to see whether there are other qualities that determine the river’s ability to support life.